Dieser Internet-Auftritt kann nach dem Tod des Webmasters, Peter Strutynski, bis auf Weiteres nicht aktualisiert werden. Er steht jedoch weiterhin als Archiv mit Beiträgen aus den Jahren 1996 – 2015 zur Verfügung.

Say no to the ratification of the Agreements / Appell gegen die Ratifizierung der Freihandels- und Assoziierungsabkommen der Europäischen Union mit Kolumbien, Peru und Zentralamerika

Online-Unterschriften unter den deutschsprachigen Text erwünscht - Englische Erläuterungen


In meinem Namen, keine Ratifizierung!

Unterzeichnen Sie einen Brief an Ihre Abgeordneten des Europäischen Parlaments, damit sie der Ratifizierung der Freihandels- und Assoziierungsabkommen der Europäischen Union mit Kolumbien, Peru und Zentralamerika nicht zustimmen.

Die Abkommen, die nun dem Europäischen Parlament zur Ratifikation vorliegen, zielen auf Handelsbeziehungen der Europäischen Union mit Kolumbien, Peru und Zentralamerika ab, die die wirtschaftliche Lage für Bäuerinnen und Bauern verschlimmern, von ungesicherten Arbeitsbedingungen profitieren, die ernste Krise der Menschenrechtssituation in diesen Regionen noch verschärfen und verheerende Folgen für Bäuerinnen und Bauern, Indigene, die afrikanischstämmige Bevölkerung sowie die Umwelt haben. Von hier aus können wir diese Abkommen stoppen, damit die Bevölkerung in Kolumbien, Peru und Zentralamerika ihre Zukunft und die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in die eigene Hand nehmen kann und nicht an kommerzielle Interessen verkauft wird. Unterschreiben sie JETZT!

DER VOLLSTÄNDIGE TEXT:

Es geht um unsere Zukunft: Ich will faire Handelsbeziehungen.

Ich als Bürger/in der Europäischen Union (EU) setze mich dafür ein, dass die Beziehungen zwischen der EU und Lateinamerika fair und gleichberechtigt sind. Ich will gerechte Handelsbeziehungen zwischen unseren beiden Regionen und habe starke Bedenken, dass die von der EU mit Zentralamerika, Peru und Kolumbien ausgehandelten Abkommen darauf ausgerichtet sind. Dafür sprechen die folgenden Punkte:
  • Es bestehen grundlegende Unterschiede im Hinblick auf Wirtschaft und Lebensstandard zwischen Europa, Zentralamerika, Kolumbien und Peru. Diese Unterschiede erlauben es der stärkeren Vertragspartei – in diesem Fall der EU – ihre Interessen und Bestimmungen durchzusetzen, durch die die anderen Länder in der Selbstbestimmung über ihr Entwicklungsmodell eingeschränkt werden.
  • Europa strebt aufgrund der aktuellen Krise danach, seine Rolle auf dem Weltmarkt zu stärken. Dafür benötigt es privilegierte Rohstofflieferanten. Entwicklungsländer, wie die Länder Zentralamerikas sowie Peru und Kolumbien, die stärker am Welthandel teilhaben wollen, akzeptieren in diesen Abkommen die Verfestigung ihrer Rolle als Rohstoffexporteure – mit schwerwiegenden ökologischen und sozialen Folgen, auf die keine Rücksicht genommen wurde.
  • Die Abkommen stellen den Schutz von Geschäftsbeziehungen über die Menschenrechte, wodurch der Menschenrechtsschutz nicht ausreichend gewährleistet ist. Die den europäischen Unternehmen gewährten Vorteile schlagen sich auch nicht in größerem Wohlstand für die Bevölkerung nieder.
  • Als Bürger/innen sind wir nicht ausreichend über den Inhalt der Verhandlungen informiert worden. Wir sind auch nicht gefragt worden, ob wir diese Art der Handelsbeziehungen wollen.
Aus diesen und anderen Gründen möchte ich als Bürger/in mich durch Sie, meine Vertreter/innen im Europäischen Parlament, zu Wort melden und bitte Sie, gegen die Ratifizierung dieser Abkommen zu stimmen. Damit schließe ich mich zahlreichen Gruppen an, die sich bereits gegen die Abkommen gewandt haben: Gewerkschaften, Menschenrechtsorganisationen, Frauenrechtlerinnen, Indigene, Afrikanischstämmige und andere.

Nutzen wir die Gelegenheit, um gemeinsam für gleichberechtigte und faire Beziehungen einzutreten: In meinem Namen: KEINE RATIFIZIERUNG!


Hier geht es zum Formular für die Online-Unterschrift:

[externer Link]

Weitere Informationen über die Handelsabkommen in englischer, spanischer und französischer Sprache unter: http://www.fta-eu-latinamerica.org

Im Folgenden die Informationen in englischer Sprache:




Say no to the ratification of the Agreements negotiated by the European Union with Central America, Colombia and Peru.

Manifesto of Central American, Andean and European Organizations, Networks, and Social Movements.

The VI European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit of Heads of State and Government took place in Madrid, Spain on 18 May 2010. During this event, negotiations for an Association Agreement between the EU and Central America, and a Multi-party Trade Agreement between the EU and Colombia and Peru were concluded. The different networks and social movements from the three regions, who were in Madrid during the People’s Alternative Summit, discussed the reach and possible impacts of the Agreements, and established that they would coordinate activities to inform and raise public awareness, as well as carrying out advocacy work and direct action around the inherent dangers of the Agreements. As part of this process, we publish the following Manifesto:

The economic world crisis has questioned the ‘free trade’ model on which the agreements are based. The predominant free trade logic of the Agreements negotiated between the EU and Central America and between the EU and Colombia and Peru, corresponds to a model which is now strongly questioned. This model will furthermore severely limit the autonomy of the States involved, to promote and defi ne regional and national development policies in favour of the majority of their citizens. In addition, the conclusion of these agreements take place in a context of multiple crises, related to economics, climate, energy and food, a context that strongly affects the Southern countries, especially Central American and Andean countries, due to their particularly vulnerable environment.

1. From Association Agreements to Free Trade Agreements

The Agreements chiefl y favour the commercial interests of the EU, including access to markets and a range of services, investments, governmental ownership, and intellectual property. In exchange, the Central American countries, as well as Colombia and Peru, have obtained ‘certain advantages’ in market access. These advances only consolidate these countries’ current access to the General Preference System (SGP), restating their role as raw material exporters, and thereby their vulnerable position on the international market.

2. Largely asymmetric Agreements

As far as development, wellbeing and standards of living are concerned, there are huge asymmetries between the EU and Central America, Colombia and Peru. The decrease of these differences between and within the regions was to be a priority in the negotiations. Nevertheless, the Agreements do not incorporate truly effective mechanisms that could contribute to reducing the asymmetries. On the contrary, the negotiations increase these inequalities.

The results of the dairy sector negotiations are an example of this inequity. The entrance of highly subsidized European dairy products will provoke a shift in the Central American and Andean markets, and therefore affect local producers and compromise those regions’ food sovereignty. This is even more signifi cant if we consider that milk is essential to the family diet.

3. The Agreements do not favour, but in fact harm the current regional integration process

One of the fundamental objectives of the negotiations was to reinforce the sub-regional integration processes in Central America and the Andean region. This was also a characteristic which would differentiate them from the previous Free Trade Agreements negotiated with the United States. However, the process of negotiation showed important incoherencies in this matter. As far as the Andean integration process is concerned, the fact that only Peru and Colombia were accepted to continue the negotiations, has contributed to an increase in tensions among the member countries of the Andean Community. Similarly, the inclusion of Panama as part of the Agreement, without being part of the Central American Economic Integration System (SIECA), and after having announced its withdrawal from the Central American Parliament (PARLACEN), affects Central American institutional integrity.

The government of Ecuador has announced its willingness to discuss a Trade Agreement for Development with the EU. The lack of fl exibility showed by the EU in previous discussions, however, points to the unlikelihood of reaching true negotiations under these conditions. Nevertheless, in light of this situation, we are asking not only that this process be carried out in full consultation and consensus with the population, but that it also should respect the Ecuadorian Constitution, and principles of equality contained within the concept of Buen Vivir. We organizations, networks and social movements will closely monitor the direction that these conversations take.

4. The liberalization of natural resources and strategic sectors limits development possibilities and impinges upon the sovereignty of the State

European and American multinational corporations have coveted the natural resources, biodiversity, ancestral knowledge, public services, water supplies, and mineral and energetic resources of Central America and the Andean region. The Agreements favour the corporations’ interests in these areas. To place sectors which are strategic for regional development at the disposal of European corporations affects future possibilities for regional economic integration and State sovereignty, and reasserts the free trade model, while ignoring its consequences.

5. The Agreements could increase current confl icts in Colombia, Peru and the Andean region

The extractivist models applied currently, both in Central America and the Andean region, have been rejected by the population and caused social movements to defend territory and natural resources, especially among indigenous and afro descendant peoples. The Agreements negotiated with the EU tend to strengthen this model, which will aggravate existing social and environmental conflicts.

6. The Agreements do not favour the defence and promotion of human rights above free trade

Besides containing decisions which will affect the economic, social and cultural rights of Central American, Peruvian and Colombian peoples, the Agreements do not include effective mechanisms to condition commercial preferences on the fulfi lment of human rights; nor do they contain mechanisms for trading sanctions to confront human rights violations.

Additionally, it is worth highlighting that the conclusion of the negotiations was prioritised above any consideration with regards to good government or human rights. Neither the crisis for democracy in Honduras after the coup, nor the serious violations to trade union freedom in Colombia, Guatemala and Panama during the negotiations managed to alter their course.

These facts show incoherence on the part of the European Union, since it prioritised the completion of the Agreements and failed to insist on effective protection measures.

7. The Agreements limit the possibilities for civil society participation during their implementation

During the negotiations, the proposals and recommendations of a number of organisations and social movements from the three regions were overlooked. The Agreement does not include a binding mechanism for the participation of a diverse and broad range of organisations and social movements. The planned Forums are insuffi cient mechanisms for participation and do not guarantee transparency or democracy in the Agreement.

8. The Agreements overlook the Environmental Impact Assessments

The environmental Impact Assessments, commissioned by the European Commission and published before the end of the negotiations, however incomplete, nevertheless referred to impacts in certain sensitive areas. These warnings were totally overlooked when the text of the Agreement was completed, showing no intention of confronting these possible impacts.

In conclusion, considering that the economic crisis continues, that the Agreements favour the commercial interests of the EU, that they compromise strategic State resources, that they weaken the regional integration processes and that they do not imply progress in terms of human rights protection or improvements in standards of living, or in decreasing social inequalities, the organisations signing below, who come from the three regions and are concerned about these negotiations, demand that all parliaments involved in the ratifi - cation of these agreements, begin a debate about them, taking the following points into account:
  • There are lessons to be learned from the global crisis resulting from the failure of the neoliberal model on which the Agreements are based. Priority should be given to Treaties and Conventions on Human rights and Environmental protection rather than to commercial interests.
  • The principal aim of the Agreements was to reduce the existing asymmetries between the parts, yet these inequalities were not taken into account, resulting in unjust and unequal Agreements.
  • The initial purpose of the Agreements was to contribute to the strengthening of the regional integration processes, yet the results indicate a move in the opposite direction.
Considering the abovementioned points, we urge all parliament members concerned to vote against the ratifi cation, in order to create the possibility for a real discussion on relations between the EU, Central American and Andean region, from a new perspective, in equal conditions, and with a renewed agenda incorporating civil society organisations.

Quelle: Website von Free Trade Agreements EU-Latinamerica; www.fta-eu-latinamerica.org


Zurück zur Lateinamerika-Seite (arabischer Raum)

Zur EU-Europa-Seite

Zurück zur Homepage